To be or not to be XML :)

Jesse Tie Ten Quee highos at highos.com
Sat Jun 16 02:51:17 PDT 2001


Yo,

On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 01:20:32PM +0300, Florin Izvoranu wrote:
> I prefer scripts for installing because I can understand them .

granted.

> ALFS-discuss was pretty dead lately;
> maybe perl and XML takes the control from ppl and scares them ?

Perhaps..but what control do we loose in going with XML? you can still
do all the normal LFS-control-freak stuff, so...?

I have the most experience with writting profiles right now (there's a
few people whom have learned the ins and outs, etc) and when it comes to
the syntax, i agree with almost everyone that it isn't perfect and it
needs alot of work, but it has never given myself a lack of control.

And i've been LFS'ing for a very long time now and i've done some pretty
whacking things to my systems when it comes to control, so i'll have to
ask you to elaborate on this (unless your just trying to ask if this is one
reason some people don't like XML)

I think alot of people don't understand nor have they tried writting
profiles yet, but i can't blame them, considering there isn't really any
documented syntax, anyways...

> "Starting From Scratch(tm)," sounds good for me and maybe will exist
> something like: perl-ALFS , XML-ALFS and what I want Scripts-ALFS .

Actually it does allready exist, there's been ALFS implementions of
scripts, done in perl, bash, makefile-based, etcetc... we could always
go this way, but we it wouldn't give us alot to expand on, imo.

There's LFSMake which is Makefile based;
http://www.sunsetsystems.com/lfsmake.php3

There's Richard Lightman's ALFS Implementation (RALFS) in bash;
http://www.reika.demon.co.uk/

And another bash implementation;
http://scholli.exhome.de/

etc,etc... off-hand, i think i could count up to 20 different people have
written scripts to compile LFS for themselves.

> http://alfs.linuxfromscratch.org/intro/ is like other distro's homepage
> distro= bloated, security concerns etc.

Would it scare you to know that if i had access to your box i could root
it inside of 10 seconds? :)

I don't consider security bloat, bloat is installing a bunch of crap you
don't need, which even with ALFS doesn't happen.

I have two fresh builds on my development box, one is 2.4.4 and the
other is 3.0-pre2, and they are only *LFS* builds, they include
everything done in chapter 4,5,6,7 and 9, nothing more nothing less, i
could sit you down on a fresh build and you guys would not know i had
used ALFS on them.

I haven't installed ALFS on those builds yet, it isn't needed if you
don't want to use ALFS past this point, so... (just trying to say that
even if we just used ALFS to bootstrap the user with a full LFS system,
that user would not have to use nor touch ALFS afterwards)

Is there anything specific that you considering about ALFS that gives you the
idea of "bloat"?  Not everyone's definition of bloat is the same, so...

Anyways.. no worries that you aren't an english-native speaker, we are
living in an i18n world, but you haven't given enough details to really
answer anything you have posted so far :)

-- 
Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to alfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list